r108…your inability to separate attacks on arguments from attacks on the person making the argument is remarkable. Your perseverance would normally be commendable but sticking to the worst kind of transparently dishonest argument has earned my pity instead.

It’s tough to refute an argument composed almost exclusively of logical fallacy and unsourced innuendo thus I can only repeat why Moran’s statements as quoted are not antisemitic in my opinion. AIPAC policy preference is not the same as Jewish community policy preference. It is quite easy to criticise AIPAC without criticising Jews in general and the proposition that Moran’s words constitute antisemitism is wrong.

Does that make me a racist?

You know as well as I do, Dave, that according to lefties, any criticism of a black person is racism. That isn’t my point, of course, but I know you enjoy making yourself look silly with your pathetic attempts at analogy.

BTW, Mike, no part of my criticisms of Hussein Obama have anything to do with race or religion. I just think he’s unfit for any public office. It’s an individual criticism, not a general one. Moran’s criticism of AIPAC was, in part, involved with their being Jewish. Without saying it directly, he was calling them the favorite leftie name for Jews who have left the Dem plantation: neocons.

r108…I don’t think he’s against some Jews so much as he’s against some Jews’ policy positions.

WB…r108 is just being a scamp and believes no such thing.

So why does Moran single out the Jews? It’d be interesting to hear him answer that.

According to the quote you provide Moran singles out AIPAC, not the Jews.

Jimmy Carter has just jumped on the anti-AIPAC, anti-Israel bandwagon.

Jimmy Carter would never stick a knife in Israel’s back!
He will merely take those already stuck there and twist them!

I’m not Dave but I get that your argument, or what there is to it, is simply intellectually dishonest and pure nonsense

Hey, Mike, I thought you were the resident expert on intellectually dishonesty and pure nonsense. The way you cherry pick and obfuscate puts you well in the lead.

r108…I get it. It’s like how your disapproval of Senator Obama demonstrates you’re only against some blacks.

Not even close. Another bad analogy from you, Mike; you must be getting desperate to defend your mistakes by a pathetic attempt to play the race card. I called you on your statement, and you can’t deal with it.

r108…I get it. It’s like how your disapproval of Senator Obama demonstrates you’re only against some blacks.

Are you insane? Do you have any idea what you’re saying and how it makes you look?

More ad hominem instead of facts/logic. No matter how much you try to make this about me, I only care about the truth. I don’t care how I “look” to you, only that what I say is true, and you have not presented anything that demonstrates what I said was untrue. Rather, you have avoided the facts of the matter, and have continued to try to win by denigration. That just doesn’t work with me.
I realize you are antiwar, and also anti-”neocon”, so your looking the other way when a Dem makes antisemitic remarks is totally understandable. I’m not on your plantation, so I speak my mind. Sorry it makes you so uncomfortable.

Moran’s comments about AIPAC are pretty much NAZI boilerplate about how rich Jews control everything from behind the scenes.

I’d agree with you if Moran was talking about all Jews or even all wealthy Jews but since you can read you know he’s not.

MikeA: Good Luck on your trading.

Wrong, Mike. It’s the same old wheeze about a “Jewish cabal” running things from behind the scenes. Why do you support such a venemous concept? Why are you trying to excuse Moran saying such a thing?

r108…what mistake was that? I assume you mean that I thought you were joking with your ludicrous question but please correct me if I’m wrong.

The question followed perfectly from what you said(which was the ludicrous part, IMO) and what Moran said.

Moran’s statements about AIPAC revealed his antisemitism; I have said so from the very beginning.
I called you on your trying to split hairs by claiming that his criticism of some Jews(AIPAC) was somehow not antisemitic. I don’t agree with you there, and made it quite clear. It seems silly to me to maintain that accusing some Jews of doing things that they have been persecuted for throughout the ages is not antisemitic if you don’t include all Jews in that accusation. What percentage is necessary to qualify it as antisemitic? Fifty percent? Ninety-five percent? If one accused all Jews but one of that crap, is that somehow not antisemitic by you thinking, since “all Jews” are not included?

I’m saying straight out that it’s not appropriate for a publicly elected official to attack a particular ethnic group.

I agree with you. How do you feel about elected officials criticising a particular interest group?

If he had said this about a bunch of rich and powerful blacks, or gays, would you react the same way?

If the bunch of blacks or gays constituted an interest group which advocated policies with which the elected official didn’t agree then I would react the same way. I take it you don’t brook criticism of the NCAAP by elected officials or am I wrong?

Joel…leave aside my “ilk” for a moment and look at what Moran said. He criticised AIPAC. When you criticise Hispanic immigration groups are you against Mexicans? When you criticise Democrats are you against Americans? When you criticise abortionists are you against doctors? Some here seem to be taking criticism of AIPAC as veiled antisemitism. Is that your position as well?

Your ilk “infers” religious intolerance of Islam when critics factually represent muslim aims and label it “Islamapohbia.”

I don’t believe that all Muslims should be judged by the words and actions of a violent sect. After all, if Islam really is the enemy then why does America support the Iraqi government? Isn’t it composed of Muslims?

But maybe it was just another [botched joke eh?]

I thought r108 was joking but I now see he’s not. Why don’t you read what Moran said and see how Rob’s post is misleading then if I try to pull the same thing, you can call me on it? That’s better than talking about my “ilk” and ascribing statements to me that I’ve never made.

I’m not Dave but I get that your argument, or what there is to it, is simply intellectually dishonest and pure nonsense.

You continue to try to make me the issue rather than the facts.

Why don’t you read what Moran said

As usual, Mike, you are a muslim apologist. I read the WaPo article (did you?) and here is what it said with regard with Morans anti-Jew, pro-muslim history.

Although hailed for forging ties with the region’s Muslim community, Moran has gotten into trouble with the local Jewish community before. In 2001, he angered groups by saying in an appearance before the American Muslim Council that then-Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon was coming to Washington “probably seeking a warrant from President Bush to kill at will with weapons we have paid for.”

The next year, Moran returned $2,000 in political contributions from a Muslim activist with ties to the anti-Israeli groups Hamas and Hezbollah. [gee, I wonder what he said or did to deserve the terrorist support]

And in 2003, at an antiwar forum in Reston, Moran said: “If it were not for the strong support of the Jewish community for this war with Iraq, we would not be doing this. The leaders of the Jewish community are influential enough that they could change the direction of where this is going, and I think they should.”

You can spin this anyway you want (and I’m sure you will) but Moran is clearly a muslim supporter and a jewish detractor and I expect everything he says will echo his biases.

r108…why is criticism of AIPEC antisemetic? Is criticism of the Israeli Labour party also antisemitic?

You keep using the same old tactic, Mike; generalizing a specific statement. This thread is about Moran making antisemitic statements.

Anyone disagreeing with you about anything are objects of your extreme, unreasoning hatred! Your reference to Islamic terrorists being your enemies
is silly a smokescrean for your rather generic, overarching hatred of almost everyone in the world.

There you go again, projecting your emotional state on others. It is you, Neiman, who unrelentingly spews hatred on this blog. I’m sorry you don’t have the emotional maturity to deal with disagreement, but that certainly isn’t my problem.
It is impossible for me to feel anything for you but pity.

My name is also Moran. Moran is an Irish name that original came from Spain. I always learned that the original Morans were sailors from the Spanish Armada that sank off the coast of Ireland. In Spanish the name Moran comes from Morano. Morano was the name given to jews who chose to convert during the Inquisition, it means “pig.” Even though they converted, they were still looked down upon.

I think if groups such as AIPAC want to influence public policy then government members should feel free to offer their opinions.

Interesting ideology; sorry I missed it at first. So, if a bunch of rich, powerful Jews are doing something the Dems don’t like, they are somehow entitled to use their political power to go against a group of citizens expressing their views? Interesting. You have no problem with that? Sounds like you think it’s OK to crush dissent for political purposes.

For your line of reasoning to hold validity you would be forced to admit that Jews criticising AIPAC are also antisemitic…

Not unless they are elected public officials; you missed that part of my argument. BTW, is your example merely hypothetical, or do you have any examples?

You’re a right winger…

Only in your mind…who’s the authoritarian here?

Before I waste any more of my time with your minutiae, let me ‘splain it to you. I already know that Dems/lefties are racist, homophobic and bigoted in every way. I don’t care so much about Moran’s and Carter’s antisemitism, but I do care that the Dems want to extend their pandering to the Islamofascists by trying to throw Israel under the bus, and all for their own selfish political purposes. Any questions?

AIPAC policy preference is not the same as Jewish community policy preference. Exactly. Moran was trying to drive a wedge between AIPAC and the rest of the Jewish community. That was one of my points. It was the part about “good Jews” and “bad Jews”, remember? It is quite easy to criticise AIPAC without criticising Jews in general It certainly is, in general, but Moran was doing something else. and the proposition that Moran’s words constitute antisemitism is wrong. I think what he was doing was very obvious, but you disagree. Notice I used no denigrating or dismissive language in disagreeing with you.

Whenever you feel like addressing my objection to Rob’s post with something beyond reactionary platitudes, please let me know.

I have already done so many times.

If replying to your personal attacks with comments about your “style of argument” is considered by you to be a personal attack, so be it.

It was the part about “good Jews” and “bad Jews”, remember?

I remember…that is an example of the unsourced innuendo I was referring to.

It certainly is, in general, but Moran was doing something else.

Your evidence for this other than the standard Dems bad, lefties bad, etc. etc.

I think what he was doing was very obvious, but you disagree.

True.

Notice I used no denigrating or dismissive language in disagreeing with you.

I find your entire line of reasoning an insult to my intelligence and an affront to the dignity of blog commentators everywhere. You don’t need to employ denigrating or dismissive language because your “argument” does it for you.

Right on, Bat! Of course, the only example Rob and I used was what Moran actually said. Shame on us! /sarcasm

When Moran said: “I don’t think they represent the mainstream of American Jewish thinking at all…”
He was saying that AIPAC’s support of the war(“pushing the war” as he said it) was Jewish thinking, but not “mainstream Jewish thinking”, so he was directly talking about their Jewishness. He definitely indicated not only that AIPAC were the “bad Jews”, but arrogated to himself the position of deciding what comprises “mainstream Jewish thinking”. But don’t question his Semitism!

I do like. Perhaps you’ll like this collection of court documents relating to the AIPAC espionage prosecution, given your distaste for the leaking of government documents and all. I shouldn’t take the prosecution of AIPAC staffers for espionage as antisemitism though, should I?

Perhaps the Justice Department is trying to drive a wedge between AIPAC and the Jewish community.

Casting aspersions on an opponent’s motives in hopes of subverting the power of that opponent’s argument is an all too common tactic among those on the Left.

It’s common on the Right too…which leads me to believe that it is a human trait rather than an ideological one.

Now if we could just do something about those puns….

You believe that Moran’s criticism of AIPAC is criticism of Jews generally and you think that’s antisemitism.

I believe no such thing. Moran specifically referred to their being Jews in his statement, which made it an ethnic reference. If he had just disagreed with their support for the war, that would be normal for a leftie, but he mentioned their being Jewish, and that’s where he crossed the line. His using stereotypical antisemitic imagery just compounds his mistake.
As I asked you originally, is it OK to criticize some Jews, but deny that you are criticizing Jews?

If his screed was just about opposition to the war, why mention the “J-word” at all?

Because AIPAC is a Jewish lobby group. Duh. Also, Tikkun is a California-based Jewish magazine but I wouldn’t expect you to worry too much about the details.

Bat One

The problem with your argument is that you expect liberals to be rational and logically consistent.

Et tu B1? I don’t think the rules of this debate permit the use of examples to make one’s point. I know you are joking with the “rational and logically consistent” remark…perhaps a little humour is what’s needed although if you do see logic in r108′s argument, I’d love to hear your take.

r108

Your style of “debate” is very weak, and I can see why you might be insulted by my “style” of argument, which is very strong and true.

How ironic, a personal attack…the sure sign that you know how weak your argument is. Whenever you feel like addressing my objection to Rob’s post with something beyond reactionary platitudes, please let me know.

r108…when you’re elected President of your Constitutional Republic then you can determine what political terminology we can and can not use.

Oh, please! You are using a term inaccurately, and I called you on it. Now you need exaggeration? Personal attack not enough for you?

Only in your mind…who’s the authoritarian here?

If it was only in my mind then obviously I wouldn’t bring it up.

I already know that Dems/lefties are racist, homophobic and bigoted in every way.

Sadly I have no witty retort for that gem but I will use that as my signature for awhile. I’ll get back to you if I have any questions.

Actually, Congressman Jim Moran (D-VA) is no stranger to the far left side of the fence. And his foot is obviously well acquainted with the inside of his mouth. Nor is this his first attempt at anti-Jewish bigotry.

Both Greyhawk at Mudville Gazette and James Taranto of WSJ’s Best of the Web quoted Moran as blaming the Jews for the invasion of Iraq… back in 2003!

“If it were not for the strong support of the Jewish community for this war with Iraq we would not be doing this,” said Moran.

Taranto then went on to offer this eerily similar quote,

This is a war that has been promoted for years by the most radical Jewish supremacists in Israel and America.

The author of that second quote was racist extraordinaire, David Duke.

Sorry but that doesn’t address it at all. It merely explains why the word “Jewish” came up…that was your question. Remember?

Please, Mike, try to keep up. You indicated that I was somehow unaware that he was speaking to one group of Jews about another group of Jews, specifically trying to create distance between them. Here’s what you said:

Because AIPAC is a Jewish lobby group. Duh. Also, Tikkun is a California-based Jewish magazine but I wouldn’t expect you to worry too much about the details.

I then pointed out that I had made this point already, indicating that I was aware that he was addressing one group of Jews to separate them from another group of Jews. Remember what I said about “good Jews” and “bad Jews”? I covered it pretty well, in fact, so your statement implying that I was unaware that he was speaking to one group of Jews(who he described as being not only different from AIPAC, but as being the “mainstream” of Jewish thinking), was not only wrong, but egregiously so.
In fact, not only did he arrogate to himself the power to declare what is “mainstream Jewish thinking”(what authority does he have to make that judgment?), but that another group, with whom he differs, does not represent “mainstream Jewish thinking”. His entire statement concerns Jewishness, and his judgments about it. How is that not antisemitic? Who is he to make those judgments?

I find your entire line of reasoning an insult to my intelligence and an affront to the dignity of blog commentators everywhere. You don’t need to
employ denigrating or dismissive language because your “argument” does it for you.

This is possibly the funniest thing you have ever written, Mike. Your style of “debate” is very weak, and I can see why you might be insulted by my “style” of argument, which is very strong and true.
Poor baby!

Of course the real important question is whether I should buy QID on Nasdaq before closing or wait til tomorrow. Any thoughts on that?

So why does Moran single out the Jews? It’d be interesting to hear him answer that.
Absolutely

r108…thanks. I see we’ve made this thread a two pager so I think I’m done. Have a nice evening.

You see, what you are denying is that Moran’s “criticism” was ethnically-based. His descriptions match the age-old prejudice known as antisemitism. He included their Jewishness, and that’s where he crossed the line. I have said this so many times, and you have not dealt with it, except to try to dismiss me on personal grounds.

Exactly…you can stop harping on this because I do get it. You believe that Moran’s criticism of AIPAC is criticism of Jews generally and you think that’s antisemitism. I do not accept your argument because, while AIPAC is composed of Jews and does advocate for the state of Israel, AIPAC is but one voice in the Jewish community. If Moran consistently criticised all Jews and every Jewish organisation then you might be on to something.

It’s your assumption that criticism of any Jew or Jewish organisation represents an act of antisemitism that I am dismissing. I don’t dismiss your assumption on any personal grounds but because your assumption is wrong.

You also fail to deal with the part about the Dems throwing Jews and Israel “under the bus”.

Because we’re not talking about that. You’re welcome to bring it up just as I brought up the question of whether you find criticism of the Israeli Labour party antisemitic. You’re free to answer points and questions as you see fit just as I am.

I have also mentioned that his “criticism” of these rich and powerful Jews also fits right into the “neocon” stereotype advanced by those who hate the Jews who have left the Dem “plantation”.

I haven’t addressed this comment because I don’t believe that “neocons” are disaffected Jews who have left the Dem plantation. I’m comfortable with these general observations as to what a neocon is.

Of course, the only example Rob and I used was what Moran actually said. Shame on us! /sarcasm

Of course, if you read what Moran actually said then you get no idea that he’s being antisemitic. You need the unsourced innuendo and logical inconsistency provided by a helpful truthseeker to reach that conclusion.

Straight shooters those right wingers. Yup.

r108…I’m sorry but I honestly thought you were joking with your question. Since you weren’t, my serious response is that your question is ludicrous but not surprising.

I think a real antisemite can exclude most Jews from criticism because they aren’t in positions to engage in the behaviours antisemites believe Jews
engage in.

I’ll take your word for it. Once again, I consider Moran’s statements to be antisemitic. Nothing cheap or rhetorical about it. It’s a heartfelt opinion, however dismissive you try to be. I think public officials have a greater responsibility for their public utterances than does the average citizen; what politicians say carries the threat of future legislation, especially in this time of increasing govt power and influence in our lives.

In order to avoid confusing you again, Mike, here is what Moran said in his interview, describing AIPAC:

Moran said the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is “the most powerful lobby and has pushed this war from the beginning. I don’t think they represent the mainstream of American Jewish thinking at all, but because they are so well organized, and their members are extraordinarily powerful — most of them are quite wealthy — they have been able to exert power.“

So, he was only referring to wealthy, powerful Jews who are members of AIPAC, and who support the war. In other words, not all Jews, but some Jews. Get it?

r108…why is criticism of AIPEC antisemetic? Is criticism of the Israeli Labour party also antisemitic?

You continue to try to make me the issue rather than the facts.

You’re not the issue at all but rather it’s your ludicrous argument that is the issue. There is no way that I can see to construe what Moran is quoted as saying as antisemitic. Perhaps he has said things on other occasions which could be labeled antisemitic…I don’t know and that’s not what we’re debating anyway.

More ad hominem instead of facts/logic.

Guilty…sorry about that.

Rather, you have avoided the facts of the matter, and have continued to try to win by denigration.

I’m not sure what thread you’ve been reading because it can’t be this one. I have denigrated your argument because it lacks any logical consistency. I’ve explained why Moran’s statements aren’t antisemitic and I’ve demonstrated why your logic is wrong by applying it, as Dave also did, to other situations and circumstances. What is being criticised here is AIPAC’s policy positions and its ability to influence policy in Washington. Since your position is largely in accord with AIPAC’s positions on the war, on Israel and on international relations generally and because you are so virulently opposed to positions that differ from your own, you are quite comfortable adopting and advancing whatever argument supports your viewpoint.

It’s comical actually.

I realize you are antiwar, and also anti-”neocon”, so your looking the other way when a Dem makes antisemitic remarks is totally understandable.

War as a last resort only, anti-”neocon” policies, no antisemitic remarks were made, I don’t care if Moran’s a Dem or a Repub.

Sorry it makes you so uncomfortable.

It’s the dishonesty that frustrates me but I’m sure I’ll live.

dd…thanks.

That isn’t my point

I don’t care what points you are not making, I care what points you are making. If you apply the same standards to my hypothetical statement about black rappers as you did to Jim Moran’s statement, does that make me a racist? What is Robert108′s answer?

Once again you display your inability to engage in intelligent debate of the issues, it is always a personal attack with you.

More projection from our resident drama queen. It’s not all about you, Neiman.

I understand that you project your shortcomings on others.

You amaze others with your great intellect and clever retorts, not. You must be the laugh of the party!

Anyone disagreeing with you about anything are objects of your extreme, unreasoning hatred! Your reference to Islamic terrorists being your enemies is silly a smokescrean for your rather generic, overarching hatred of almost everyone in the world.

I will plead guilty to dismissing it because it’s too silly to do otherwise and I’ll have to
dismiss your delivering it if you persist.

You have yet to make a reasoned argument for your position, while I have made several for mine. Your above statement is yet another example of your being dismissive instead of making a reasoned argument.
Please explain why it is OK for an elected official to make the statement he made. A private citizen, no problem, but this guy is representing the citizens who elected him.

Ah, more intelligent debate from my arch enemy! You vastly overestimate your status; Islamic terrorists are my arch enemies. If you cannot understand that most of America has gotten literally and figuratively fat and lazy off our many great successes since our founding, you lack any understanding at all.

I understand that you project your shortcomings on others.

He criticised AIPAC. When you criticise Hispanic immigration groups are you against Mexicans? When you criticise Democrats are you against Americans? When you criticise abortionists are you against doctors?

Horse Manure Mike!!

Some here seem to be taking criticism of AIPAC as veiled antisemitism. Is that your position as well?

Yes, that’s my position as well!

Also from the link:

Moran uses several age-old canards that have been used throughout history that have brought violence upon Jews.

He uses clearly anti-Semitic images such as Jewish control of the media and wealthy Jews using their wealth to control policy.

lik…that’s a little too much common sense from you this early in the morning. Feeling okay?

r108

My answer is that your question has nothing to do with the Moran situation. I don’t think valid criticism constitutes either racism or antisemitism; Moran’s statements were antisemitism concealed as criticism of the war. In other words, he wasn’t being honest; he was attempting to drive a wedge between AIPAC and the rest of the Jewish community. Get it now?

I’m not Dave but I get that your argument, or what there is to it, is simply intellectually dishonest and pure nonsense.